[jly]

> But can ESPN exist as a network without NFL games?

Yes. It broadcasts < 20 NFL games per year. This is not a lot of airtime for a 24h sports network. It does spend a considerable amount of time talking about NFL, but that can continue whether it broadcasts their games or not. It has a 3-hour lead-in show on Sunday morning that gets sizable ratings while broadcasting zero games that day. Nobody subscribes to ESPN/cable just for MNF.

In contrast, ESPN broadcasts dozens of college football games per year and spends probably an equal amount of time - or more - discussing those. It spends about $1.4b per year in total on those TV rights which have lucrative advertising and cable subscriber value. That's in addition to all of the other sports ESPN broadcasts.

ESPN will bid less for MNF because they can't afford it any more but mostly because the ratings don't fully justify the current cost. The overall success of ESPN doesn't hinge solely on whether or not they broadcast any NFL games, it's based on how sensible the price is for the rights they own. They have plenty of other content to fill airtime that people watch and will pay a reasonable subscriber price for, even if that's not quite as much as they extract now from cable providers.

[acjohnson55]

My thoughts exactly. Their problem is that cable TV as a whole has increasingly viable substitute goods. But there's no reason ESPN can't play that same game. I imagine it's only a matter of time before they put together streaming packages they sell direct to consumer. But they'll ride the value revenue till the wheels fall off first.

[toomuchtodo]

The problem is ESPN was able to capture an outsized amount of revenue due to cable TV providers bundling it with other channels, so you had large amounts of people paying for it but not consuming it.

Cord cutters are upending the model, requiring ESPN to swim on its own without subsidies; my personal opinion is that there aren’t enough sports fans to support it except as an over the top app similar to what HBO GO is trying to do.

[acjohnson55]

Yeah, I agree with you that the gravy train is ending. But I think we mistake the ability for a business to exist at its peak or grow continually for its long-term viability. Look at the record companies. We're nearing two decades since the MP3 revolution, and most of the companies are still around in some form. ESPN, too, will have to adapt to a new post-bundle reality. But I see no real threat to their overall status as The Worldwide Leader In Sports. I'm not shedding any tears for them. They simply have to innovate.

[toomuchtodo]

Sears is still around too, but just barely. These companies that have been passed by innovation/disruption can exist in zombie form for a long time until they finally die. See: Tower Records [+]

[+] http://www.npr.org/2009/12/29/121975854/2006-and-the-death-o...

[acjohnson55]

My point is simply that it's ESPN's underlying business model that is drying up, but not its core asset of mindshare within the sports world, which remains extremely strong. I'd argue that Monday Night Football is more or less irrelevant from this perspective. They'll drop it to give themselves more runway to figure out what's next.

At the end of the day, I don't really care much whether ESPN stagnates like Sears or reinvents like Apple. But I think they live or die from a position of strength, present storm clouds aside.